About your Search

20130422
20130422
STATION
CNNW 6
MSNBCW 3
KGO (ABC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 14
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14
made without a miranda warning or made while he's not really competent between times when he's sedated and not sedated. so they may be risking their death penalty, but they may be doing it for a good reason. they may need realtime intelligence, but i don't think that the public safety exception will stand up for allowing them not to have given the miranda warnings. >> fascinating. in fact, i have a lot of questions about that i'm going to get to. and actually i want to bring in another colleague as well right now. steve razor is a former military judge advocate general and knows a thing or two about this military issue. typically, steve, we hear about a 48-hour window and this is a very new area of justice. this has only been in sort of parlay for the last couple of years. we are far outside of that 48 hours by today. but can it be extended in the case of public safety? and exactly when can you establish that a public safety exemption has expired or is no longer of concern? how long can you keep him from getting miranda? >> well, there's no hard and fast rule on that. and that's exactl
miranda rights to keep him in a gray area right now whether or not he would be considered an enemy combatant or information that he would be allowing to investigators may not be used against him if he were try to be tried as an american civilian. as i talked there with roger about the fact that congressman peter king over the weekend said the homeland is the battlefield and that times have really changed, what are your thoughts about what the congressman has said about the fbi and that they may have missed red flags and the fact that the homeland is the battlefield? >> as you know, thomas, the fbi conducts thousands of interviews like this. i will say that they do a good job. i would say unless there was some evidence that would lead them to not do something to this individual, i would say they did a good job. i think my colleague, peter king, is not just monday morning quarterbacking but arm chair quarterbacking. we don't no what our investigative authorities know. i would say let them do their job. we can comment but when we start pointing fingers, i think we just add to the conf
whether he should be read his miranda rights. >> you're giving them the option, as to whether or not they want to cooperate and i don't believe they should have that option. this is sole will i for the purpose of interrogation to find intelligence to get the intelligence that i believe we need. >> questions remain -- did the brothers have help in carrying out their attacks? >> we're satisfied that the two actors here, the two people that were committing the damage have either been arrested or killed. and the people of the city of boston can rest comfortably at this point in time. >>> but did the fbi miss warning signs after interviewing 26-year-old tamerlan tsarnaev in 2011? where did the brothers get their guns? their training? and their inspiration? >>> in washington, the boston terror attack could become an excuse to slow down immigration reform. >> if ways to improve the bill offered amendment when we start mark-up in may and let's vote on it. i say that particularly those pointing to what happened, the terrible tragedy in boston as a -- i would say excuse for not doing th
is remote. >> right. you know, judge, a lot of people h ve been talking about miranda, the public safety exception. i don't want to spend a lot of time on that. but, you know, when the police announced that the public threat was over, once dzhokhar was taken into custody, doesn't that suggest that the public safety exception doesn't kick in, or has been solidified? >> the public safety exception is in no way applicable in this case. that was for a situation where there was a gun in a public place and the police needed to know where it was. they asked the guy they just caught where's the gun before where was the gun? >>> they asked where is the gun. >> be that as it may you have a public defender in boston who is chomping at the bit to appoint a federal judge to defend the suspect. you could reassign a public defender is he or sheable to come in and say i don't want you talking to my client? >> he or she can say that. it's not going to stop this trying to do is to collect intelligence. i'm sure that if that's what they're trying to do, they will simply continue to do it, and gather only
of public safety exception before you give him his miranda rights, all that talk of naming him as an enemy combatant, all of that is moot right now. they've gone forward with the official proceedings. >> well, they may have used the public safety exception, and apparently they were using it to question him, and he responded in some way given his medical condition. but certainly now that he has a lawyer, that period, however long it was, is over. and you're right, the enemy combatant thing was a nonstarter from the never going to happen. this is a criminal case in federal court in massachusetts, and that's where it will stay until it's resolved one way or another. >> it's going to take a while. thanks very much, jeffrey. much more on what's going on in this boston investigation coming up here in "the situation room" 0. >>> also, another terror plot released today, new information. canadian authorities announcing the arrest of two men believed to be part of a terror plot to attack a passenger train that may have been heading towards the united states, the plot said to have an alleged connect
. >> and dan, how much longer can this questioning go on without reading the suspect his miranda rights? apparently, it hasn't happened yet. >> they're calling it the public safety exception. unclear how long they're allowed to do it. in past cases, like the underwear bomber, they questioned him for about 50 minutes and a court determined that was okay without a miranda warning. the further the time is away from the incident itself, the more perilous it is constitutionally. at some point, it doesn't matter. he challenges it later on, the court says, you shouldn't have done it. you shouldn't have questioned without his miranda. what happens then? that means, they throw out his statement. so what? they don't need his statement in connection. >> they have all the other evidence. >> this is about getting intelligence from him. not a statement they can use in court. >> and these charges expected to be filed. almost certain to face the death penalty. >> it will be a death-eligible charge for sure. a decision made later to seek the death penalty. the use of a weapon of mass destruction would b
-called public safety exception to the miranda rule where for some period of time, it's not entirely clear how long, a suspect can be questioned without miranda warnings and that apparently is what's happening here. again, it's complicated somewhat by the fact that we didn't know exactly what tsarnaev's medical condition is and how many questions he can answer. apparently he's answering some questions in writing. so i don't really see lindsey graham's proposal as all that differentwhat's going on now. he seems to suggest a longer process of questioning him, but the obama administration has also committed to some period of questioning. now, this all assumes that he's willing to answer questions. can he always samp simply say it answering questions and there is no way either under enemy combatant rules or in the criminal justice system to force someone to answer questions who doesn't want to answer them. >> the argument i guess is under this limited questioning period before he is formally advised of his miranda rights, he has and right to an attorney, doesn't have to answer any questions. there
of people have been talking about miranda and the public safety exception. i don't want to spend a lot of time on that. when the police announced that the public threat was over, once dhokhar was taken into custody, then, you know, doesn't that suggest that the public safety exception doesn't kick in or has been nullified? >> the public safety exception is in no way in my view applicable in the case. that was designed for a sequestration where there was a gun in a public place and the police needed to know where it was. >> judge jeanine: he had an empty who willster an holesters where is the gun. now, if a judge agrees to assign a public defender, is he then able to come in or she and say i don't want you talking to my client? >> he or she can say that. it is not going stop this process. because what they are trying to do is to collect intelligence. and i'm sure that if that is what they are trying to do they will simply continue to do it and gather only in it tell against and not disclose it to anybody who is working on the case or trying the case. they will put up what is called a ch
understand he has not been read his miranda rights, even if he can talk. what's the latest from the hospital? >> the latest official word from the hospital and through the f.b.i., the official channels releasing information is he's in serious condition and within the last 24 hours, that he's also in stable condition. so he is under the care of the physician here, clearly under heavy guard. we know he was shot in the throat because senator in the select intelligence committee has also given that information out. but that's really what we know for certain at this point in time. >> gretchen: there is this report this morning that maybe that throat wound was from an attempted suicide when the police were closing in on him, as you can see from the thermal imings of him in the boat friday night. what have you heard about that? >> well, that information doesn't come from the positions here -- physicians that are treating him and would have the closest eye view of his wounds. they're keeping all of his information to themselves as they're required to do by law and the f.b.i. not releasing that throu
administration has agreed to delay a reading of his miranda rights under a public safety exemption, secretary of defense chuck hagel has not seen evidence to link the bombings to terror groups. scrutiny turns to the fbi who reportedly questioned the older brother tamerlan in 2011 at the request of a foreign government. this is so interesting. of russia. the fbi told the a.p. despite interviewing him and relatives they did not find any activity. the agency dropped the ball. richard, i wonder if there is going to be a lot of questions and maybe even hearings out of this or what comes to mind just knowing those basic facts? >> there probably will be hearings of the fbi whether it learned more or could have done more. critics say that is monday morning quarterbacking. it ought to be about what we were talking about, what can we do to prevent or identify young people who are radicalized and how did we respond and how what did we learn about lockdowns. as the military would say it ought not to just focus on fbi. it's much bigger and much broader. we have to learn a lot from this. the reason is this
. they didn't give a miranda warning so the aclu is shouting about that. and of course, well-known southern bell lindsey graham, why isn't he being treated as an enemy combatant? that one to me -- >> what about benghazi? >> shut up. >> stephanie: i'll always have benghazi. it is my terror. no. >> i would never go thirsty again. i'll have another mint julep thank you. >> stephanie: the legal expert i heard this weekend said this is a nonstarter to treat him as enemy combatants. did he a crime on u.s. soil. >> peter king said this. >> i believe -- should be portrayed as enemy combatants. senator mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte, there are so many questions unanswered so many potential links to terrorism here. the battlefield is now in the united states. i believe he is an enemy combatant. ultimately, he will be tried in a civilian court and the statements taken from him cannot be used against him in that trial. right now, the only links we have as much as chechnyan involvement in the islamic movement. are there other conspirators out there? where do they get the radicalization? >> he so
a former federal prosecutor. we now that dzhokhar, suspect number two, has been read his miranda rights. sow won't be designated as an enemy combatant. but if he was labelled an enemy combatant, he wouldn't have been entitled to a lawyer and a jury trial. they could have asked him a lot of other questions without a lawyer present that may or may not be relevant to national security. now why did they make this decision not to go for enemy combatant status? do they think they have so much evidence in this case that they can go ahead with the civilian jury trial and they don't need to hide behind enemy combatant? >> i think that is certainly part of it. it does look like an overwhelming body of evidence. more than that, they thought they could get the immediate information they needed by the miranda exception, the public safety exception so they could make sure the public was safe. there accident seem to be an constitution aal basis to treat someone that commits a crime like this on our soil. the supreme court has upheld treating an american, the american taliban hamdi captured in afghanis
to answer this first, chris. let's talk about miranda here and the fact that his rights have not been read to him. what do you make of that? will that be an issue going forward in this particular case? >> you know, it depends. first, i don't know -- we don't know if he's said anything. if he hasn't made any statements at all, the fact that he didn't get his miranda rights read is not going to be an a relevant issue. if he's made statements i think what the government is doing in expanding that public safety exception beyond the immediacy of the act i think is something that will be taken up, and it will have to be looked at maybe by the u.s. supreme court who just last week heard oral argument in the case from houston that was asking the question when does the fifth amendment or when does your right to remain silent gyp, and so we're already looking at these issues. this is an expansion i think that expands the public safety exception. i think some court is going to have to look at that. >> thank you very much. it's been almost a week now since this city was terrorized, and it's seemingly
. just to confirm, this -- dzhokhar tsarnaev has not yet been read his miranda rights, correct? >> i have to say i don't know. because there was an initial appearance today, that's why this complaint is out. the circuit executive, the administrator of this area, has put out a statement saying there was an initial appearance before a magistrate judge. that is as far as i understand it an arraignment. i have never heard of an arraignment without an attorney present. they didn't mention an attorney present. if an attorney is present, the attorney will simply say to the client, you -- don't answer questions. at that point, the attorney is the person the prosecutor is supposed to deal with. i have to say, there is information out there that we don't have. whether an attorney was present, whether this was an actual arraignment, i think we just need to hold off on that until we get more information. >> we're holding off. still so early this all happened. >> before we let deb feyerick go and chase down that lead she was referring to, deb, i was wondering, is there anything else that stands out in
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14